Tag: abortion

The following article by Herbert W. Titus, JD, and Christine Ross first appeared in the May/June ‘99 issue of “Life Advocate” magazine.

The mainstream media tell us that the Supreme Court legalized abortion with its Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. The media also tell us that there is nothing we can do about it because Roe v. Wade is the “law of the land.”

Nothing could be further from the truth. Abortion is not legal in America! Recognition of this fact is the first step for the pro-life movement in its campaign to turn back the murderous scourge on innocent babies. Indeed, heart disease (738,781 deaths per year) is not the number one cause of death in the United States – abortion is, at well over a million deaths per year.

Article VI of our nation’s founding document declares that “[t]his Constitution, and the laws of the United States.. .made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties…made…under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land.”

What is clearly missing from this Constitutional list of supreme laws is a court opinion. This was not an oversight. Our Constitution’s writers knew that a court opinion could never be law; much less the supreme law of the land. This is especially true if that court opinion contradicted the Constitution itself.

As can be plainly seen from the Constitutional text, a statute enacted by Congress is the supreme law of the land only if made “pursuant to” (in conformity with) the Constitution. If a statute passed by the people’s representatives is not law unless it conforms to the Constitution, then how can a court opinion decided by unelected judges be given a higher status?

When Chief Justice John Marshall established judicial review-the right of the court to review a statute to see if it conformed to the Constitution-he said that the written Constitution was just as binding on the courts as it was on Congress. Marshall, then, did not establish the supremacy of judges over the Constitution-but the supremacy of the Constitution over Congress, the President and the courts.

Our Founding Fathers resoundingly rejected the idea of judicial supremacy. They did not empower judges to usurp a power, rightfully belonging to the people and thereby become a law unto themselves. That is why they put the Constitution in writing-so that the original founding laws and principles would not be mistaken or forgotten. In this way they believed that the Constitution would become the fixed law of the land.

Just a little more than 100 years ago, the American people knew that Supreme Court opinions did not become the law for the whole country, but bound only the parties to the case. That is why Abraham Lincoln rejected the Supreme Court’s decision in the infamous Dred Scott case. Lincoln knew that even though the Court declared-in the name of the Constitution that black people had no rights that white people were bound to respect, that ruling was not the law of the land.

What has happened to America since the days of Lincoln?

Things began to change when Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., ascended to the Supreme Court. He introduced the idea that law changed with changing times, and that it was the business of judges to make the necessary changes.

Holmes’s evolutionary philosophy of law soon transformed the Constitution from a document of fixed rules and principles to one reflecting the latest court pronouncements. In this way, the judges became the nation’s supreme lawmakers, displacing the Congress and legislatures on matters ranging from abortion to pornography.

But judges have no right to make law. Their job is to discover the law, state it and apply it. Their role is like that of an engineer who designs a bridge according to the discovered laws of the natural world, not according to “laws” that he has made up.

If an engineer should design a bridge contrary to natural law, there is no question that the government officials who employed that engineer would reject his design. So it should be with a court opinion. If it is contrary to the Constitution, then the president, the Congress and the fifty states’ governors and legislators should reject that opinion.

This is what their oath of office demands. The president takes an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution,” not Supreme Court opinions. Further, Article II, Section 3 states that the president is duty-bound to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Any court opinion that is contrary to the Constitution is, by definition, not law. Therefore, the president must not enforce it.

That was what President Lincoln did with the Dred Scott decision. He refused to enforce it as the law of the land.

That is what presidents today should do about Roe v. Wade. Pursuant to his Constitutional oath, the president should issue a proclamation declaring Roe v. Wade to be illegal, and declaring that the human fetus is a person entitled to the full protection of the right to life by the states.

At the state and local level, the people should insist that the laws that are still on the books be enforced against abortionists. In Virginia, for example, abortion is still a Class 4 felony. While other Virginia statutes have incorporated the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade, those statutes are unconstitutional. They violate Article 1, Section 1 of the Virginia Bill of Rights which denies to the state legislature or any other civil authority any power to deprive the state’s “posterity” (the yet-to-be-born) of their “inherent” rights to “life, liberty, and property.”

In Virginia, then, pro-lifers do not have to change the state law to protect innocent life. They don’t have to look to the president or Congress for action. They don’t have to elect a pro-life governor or state attorney general. They can act now, petitioning their local Commonwealth’s Attorney to prosecute abortionists under the state law and defend the right to life of the preborn under the state Constitution. And if the Commonwealth’s Attorney chooses not to prosecute, then the people can vote him out of office and elect another who will do his prosecutorial duty consistent with his Constitutional oath.

A petition drive has already begun in Virginia. The governor and the attorney general have been petitioned to speak out, urging the Commonwealths’ Attorneys to prosecute the abortionists. While neither office has the authority to command such prosecutions, such a statement would have a profound moral impact. Some local prosecutors have also been petitioned to take action now.

As concerned citizens, it is our duty to petition the Commonwealth’s Attorneys to make decisions according to what the Constitution demands, and not according to what the Supreme Court decides. And it is our further duty to continue to seek justice until we receive it.

Thomas More Law Center Files Supreme Court Brief in Support of Ten Commandments Display

ANN ARBOR, MI. Dec., 13 /Covenant News Wire Service/ — The Thomas More Law Center, a national pubic interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that is has filed a friend of the court brief with the United States Supreme Court in support of Ten Commandments displays on public property. The case will be heard by the high court in February 2005 with a decision expected in June 2005.

The case involves two displays of the Ten Commandments in the lobbies of Kentucky courthouses in McCreary and Pulaski counties. Both displays originally only included framed copies of the Ten Commandments. After the ACLU sued to remove the displays, the two counties supplemented the framed copies of the Commandments with eleven historical documents, including the Mayflower Compact and the Bill of Rights, calling the new displays the “Foundations of American Law and Government.” The additional documents were chosen because, like the Ten Commandments, they played a significant role in the foundation of our system of law and government.

Despite the additions, a federal trial judge struck down the “Foundations” display because it included the Ten Commandments. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit agreed with the trial judge’s ruling, holding that the original display, which had only included the Ten Commandments, was “blatantly religious” and therefore “unconstitutionally tainted” the subsequent “Foundations” display. The case was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

According to Edward L. White III, attorney with the Thomas More Law Center, “We trust the Supreme Court will reverse the decisions of the lower courts and permit the public display of the Ten Commandments, which has largely influenced the foundation of American law, and should be displayed in public.” “Our brief addresses the Sixth Circuit’s novel ‘unconstitutional taint’ argument and explains how it runs contrary to the governing law,” said White.

The Supreme Court’s acceptance of a case dealing with the public display of the Ten Commandments is long overdue. Since the Court struck down the display of the Ten Commandments in public schools in 1980, the justices have refused to review numerous cases involving the display of the Commandments on public property. Varying lower court decisions on the issue have led to widespread confusion and controversy, highlighted last year by the highly publicized case involving former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore.

The high court’s decision in this case could determine how courts will analyze future disputes over the display of other religious symbols on public property, such as nativity scenes and Christian crosses.

The Thomas More Law Center has been involved in several cases involving the defense of the Ten Commandments, including two victories earlier this year in defeating separate efforts to remove displays of the Commandments from the cities of Pleasant Grove and Duchesne, Utah.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.

A Revolution in Evolution Is Underway

ANN ARBOR, MI. Jan., 18 /Covenant News Wire Service/ — The small town of Dover, Pennsylvania today became the first school district in the nation to officially inform students of the theory of Intelligent Design, as an alternative to Darwin’s theory of Evolution.

In what has been called a “measured step”, ninth grade biology students in the Dover Area School District were read a four-paragraph statement Tuesday morning explaining that Darwin’s theory is not a fact and continues to be tested. The statement continued, “Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view.”

Since the late 1950s advances in biochemistry and microbiology, information that Darwin did not have in the 1850s, have revealed that the machine like complexity of living cells – the fundamental unit of life- possessing the ability to store, edit, and transmit and use information to regulate biological systems, suggests the theory of intelligent design as the best explanation for the origin of life and living cells.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm representing the school district against an ACLU lawsuit, commented, “Biology students in this small town received perhaps the most balanced science education regarding Darwin’s theory of evolution than any other public school student in the nation. This is not a case of science versus religion, but science versus science, with credible scientists now determining that based upon scientific data, the theory of evolution cannot explain the complexity of living cells.”

“It is ironic that the ACLU after having worked so hard to prevent the suppression of Darwin’s theory in the Scopes trial, is now doing everything it can to suppress any effort to challenge it,” continued Thompson.

The Dover high school assistant superintendent read the four-paragraph one- minute statement to two biology classes this morning totaling 35 students. Teachers reported that there were no problems in class after the statements were read and the entire process was uneventful. Biology classes this afternoon and tomorrow will also hear the statement.

Very few students took advantage of the school provided opportunity to opt out from hearing the statement – an estimated 15 students out of a total of 170. National polls consistently show that most parents want schools to teach alternative theories to evolution. In fact, a November 2004 CBS Poll showed that nearly two-thirds of Americans said they favored teaching creationism alongside evolution in schools.

The ACLU and Americans United sued the Dover Area School District over the policy last December. The School Board selected to the Thomas More Law Center to represent them in the federal lawsuit. In early January, after several depositions of board members and reviewing documents, the ACLU announced they would not seek a court order to immediately block the statement from being read.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.

Supreme Court Showdown

ANN ARBOR, MI. Jan., 27 /Covenant News Wire Service/ — With little over a month before the United States Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments on whether public displays of the Ten Commandments are constitutional, the Thomas More Law Center announced today that it has filed a “friend of the court brief” in the case of Van Orden v. Perry supporting the right of Texas to display the historically significant monument.

This is the second of two briefs that the Law Center has filed in the past two months with the Supreme Court defending Ten Commandment displays on public property. The first brief was filed in December in the case of ACLU v. McCreary County. Both cases will be decided by the Supreme Court later in the year.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center commented, “The roots of American law are grounded in the timeless truths contained in the Ten Commandments, and we must not abandon this heritage.”

The Law Center’s brief was filed with the Supreme Court on Thursday in the case of Van Orden v. Perry. Thomas Van Orden, a former criminal defense attorney who became homeless, filed a federal lawsuit against the State of Texas challenging a granite monument on which the Ten Commandments were etched. In his lawsuit, Van Orden argued that the appearance of the Ten Commandments monument on government property violated the First Amendment.

Both the district court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled against Van Orden, upholding the display of the Ten Commandments as constitutional. The case was then appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Texas State Capitol Building contains a wide array of monuments, plaques, and seals depicting both the secular and religious history of Texas. They include a tribute to African American legislators, a plaque commemorating the war with Mexico, a statue of a pioneer woman holding a child in tribute to the role of women in Texas history, and a tribute to the Texans lost at Pearl Harbor. The six foot tall Ten Commandments monument was a gift of the Fraternal Order of Eagles, accepted by a joint resolution of the House and Senate in early 1961

The Thomas More Law Center’s brief argued that the attack on Ten Commandments displays is based on the 1980 Supreme Court decision in Stone v. Graham, in which the Supreme Court held that the Ten Commandments could not be posted in public school classrooms. Although Stone is limited to the public school setting, courts have relied on Stone in ruling against the Ten Commandments even when displayed in non-public school settings.

According to Edward L. White III, Trial Counsel of the Law Center, “Stone is a weak precedent that the Supreme Court decided without the benefit of briefing and oral argument. We trust the Supreme Court will re-evaluate Stone and will clarify the proper scope and applicability, if any, of Stone in cases involving the display of the Ten Commandments in non-public school settings.”

On the same day that the Supreme Court hears oral argument in Van Orden, the Court will be hearing argument in the case of ACLU v. McCreary County, another Ten Commandments case. That case involves two displays of the Ten Commandments in the lobbies of Kentucky courthouses in McCreary and Pulaski counties. Both displays originally only included framed copies of the Ten Commandments. After the ACLU sued to remove the displays, the two counties supplemented the framed copies of the Commandments with eleven historical documents, including the Mayflower Compact and the Bill of Rights, calling the new displays the “Foundations of American Law and Government.” The additional documents were chosen because, like the Ten Commandments, they played a significant role in the foundation of our system of law and government.

Despite the additions, a federal trial judge struck down the “Foundations” display because it included the Ten Commandments. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit agreed with the trial judge’s ruling, holding that the original display, which had only included the Ten Commandments, was “blatantly religious” and therefore “unconstitutionally tainted” the subsequent “Foundations” display. The Thomas More Law Center filed its brief in support of the Ten Commandments displays in the McCreary County case last December.

“Both the Van Orden and McCreary County cases will provide the Supreme Court the opportunity once and for all to state that the display of the Ten Commandments, whether alone or as part of a broader display, are constitutional,” continued Thompson. “The high court’s decision in these cases could determine how courts will analyze future disputes over the display of other religious symbols on public property, including nativity scenes and Christian crosses.”

The Law Center has been involved in several cases involving the defense of the Ten Commandments, including two victories earlier this year in defeating separate efforts to remove displays of the Commandments from the cities of Pleasant Grove and Duchesne, Utah.

Oral arguments before the nine justices of the Supreme Court are scheduled for March 2, 2005, with a decision in the case expected in June.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.

Court’s Hostility To Religion

ANN ARBOR, MI. June 27 /Covenant News Wire Service/ — According to Richard Thompson, Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, a national pubic interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, today’s United States Supreme Court rulings in the two Ten Commandment cases, one from Kentucky and the other from Texas, will have the practical effect of discouraging some public entities from displaying religious symbols.

Said Thompson, “Justice Scalia got it right. These decisions do not rest on consistently applied principles of law. Thus, the Court announced no rule of law, which government entities can depend upon that will give them any reasonable certainty they are complying with the requirements of the Establishment Clause. Consequently, some local governments will decide not to take a chance and be forced to pay monstrous attorney fee awards to organizations like the ACLU if they lose. One political solution is to remove the statutory attorney fee awards to the prevailing party in these kinds of cases.” “However, I am certain of one thing,” said Thompson, ” this battle is far from over.”

The Thomas More Law Center filed friend of the court briefs in favor of the Ten Commandment displays in both McCreary County v. ACLU and Van Orden v. Perry.

In its 5 to 4 decision issued today in the McCreary case, the Supreme Court ruled that the displays of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky courthouses in McCreary and Pulaski counties violated the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. Both displays originally included only framed copies of the Ten Commandments. After the ACLU sued to remove the displays, the two counties supplemented the framed copies of the Commandments with eleven historical documents, including the Mayflower Compact and the Bill of Rights, calling the new displays the “Foundations of American Law and Government.” The additional documents were chosen because, like the Ten Commandments, they played a significant role in the foundation of our system of law and government.

Despite the additions, a federal trial judge struck down the “Foundations” display because it included the Ten Commandments. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit agreed with the trial judge, holding that the original display, which had only included the Ten Commandments, “unconstitutionally tainted” the subsequent “Foundations” display, making them unconstitutional as well. A sharply divided Supreme Court agreed, noting that the Kentucky counties had not sufficiently distanced themselves from any religious purpose in the first displays.

The four dissenting justices (Justices Scalia, Rehnquist, Kennedy, and Thomas) criticized the majority’s decision and the majority’s application of the so-called Lemon test, which the dissenters explained can be manipulated to fit whatever result the Court wants to achieve. They noted that even if a government could show that its actual purpose in displaying the Ten Commandments was not to advance religion, the display could still be struck down if the Court’s imaginary “objective observer” would conclude that the government officials intended to advance religion. The dissenters explained that the majority’s new use of the Lemon test has ratcheted up the Court’s hostility to religion.

Richard Thompson, Chief Counsel commented: “As the four dissenting justices explained, the five majority justices have ratcheted up the Supreme Court’s hostility to religion in this case. The use of the faulty Lemon test by courts is a way to silence religion in this country. Courts, as the dissenters noted, can use the Lemon test to find a religious purpose when none was intended by the government.”

Edward L. White III, trial counsel with the Law Center, explained that “Although the Court ruled against the displays in the two Kentucky counties based on the unique facts of the case, the Court explicitly stated that it was not ruling across the board that the Ten Commandments or other sacred texts cannot be displayed as part of a government display on the subject of law or American history. As such, government can continue to include the Ten Commandments in displays on public property.”

The Supreme Court upheld the display of a Ten Commandments monument on the Texas Capitol grounds in the Van Orden case. The monument had stood on government grounds for more than forty years. A few years ago, Thomas Van Orden, a former criminal defense attorney who became homeless, filed a federal lawsuit against the State of Texas challenging the granite monument on which the Ten Commandments were etched. In his lawsuit, Van Orden argued that the appearance of the Ten Commandments monument on government property violated the First Amendment.

Both the district court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled against Van Orden, upholding the display of the Ten Commandments as constitutional. The case was then appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Texas State Capitol Building contains a wide array of monuments, plaques, and seals depicting both the secular and religious history of Texas. They include a tribute to African American legislators, a plaque commemorating the war with Mexico, a statue of a pioneer woman holding a child in tribute to the role of women in Texas history, and a tribute to the Texans lost at Pearl Harbor. The six foot tall Ten Commandments monument was a gift of the Fraternal Order of Eagles, accepted by a joint resolution of the House and Senate in early 1961.

In the decision issued today, Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, with a concurrence by Justice Breyer, ruled that the display of the Ten Commandments monument on the Capitol grounds was constitutional. In reaching its ruling, however, the Court was fractured with regard to what analysis it should apply to decide such cases. Thus, the Supreme Court has provided little guidance for government entities to follow in erecting displays of the Ten Commandments that will pass constitutional muster.

The Thomas More Law Center has been involved in several cases involving the defense of the Ten Commandments, including two victories last year in defeating separate efforts to remove displays of the Commandments from the cities of Pleasant Grove and Duchesne, Utah.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.

Judge Greer Breaks Law to Ensure Terri Schiavo’s Death

Judge George W. Greer ignores Florida laws and orders the premeditated killing of disabled Florida woman by her husband

To: National Desk

Clearwater, FL., March 10 /Covenant News Wire Service/ — On Tuesday and Wednesday, March 8 and 9, 2005, Sixth Circuit Judge George W. Greer issued three orders that all but assure the death of Terri Schiavo, beginning on Friday, March 18, 2005.

Order Denying Food and Fluids Naturally After Gastric Tube Removal Greer ordered that the family of Terri Schiavo may not introduce oral nutrition and hydration following the removal of Terri’s gastric feeding tube. Florida Statute 744.3215 (Rights of Persons Determined Incapacitated) require that incapacitated persons cannot be deprived of necessary services including food and water. Ordering that Terri Schiavo may not receive nutrition or hydration naturally is against the law, in the opinion of the Foundation.

Order Denying Updated Medical Tests Greer ordered that no further neurological tests may be offered to Terri Schiavo, utilizing functional MRI to determine if she is in a ‘persistent vegetative state’ (As Greer found in 2002) or is her condition is ‘minimally conscious’. Florida Statute 765.404 which defines persistent vegetative state require that the condition be determined and diagnosed as permanent prior to the withdrawal of life-prolonging means. Further, Florida Statute 765.309 prevents mercy killing and assisted suicide. Without determining the true neurological condition of Terri Schiavo prior to the withdrawal of foods and fluids, the Foundation finds Judge Greer’s Order to remove Nutrition and Hydration a directive for her guardian to commit either a mercy killing or assisted suicide.

Order Denying Relief from Judgment Greer denied an order from judgment based on his error in dismissing pertinent testimony in 2000 that would assist the court in determining Terri Schiavo’s true end of life wishes. Under Florida Statute 765.404, clear and convincing evidence of the ward’s intent for medical treatment must be established. The only evidence in support of removing Terri’s feeding tube was the self-serving hearsay testimony of her guardian (which is not admissible under FS 90.602) and hearsay from two members of his immediate family. Greer systematically ruled that testimony from Terri’s friends and family was unreliable or not credible. His failure to consider all evidence of Terri Schiavo’s attitudes towards life-prolonging measures, in the Foundation’s opinion, is a clear violation of Florida Statutes.

Statement of Pamela Hennessy, Media Director for the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation: If there is a single person following this who doesn’t believe Judge Greer has legislated from the bench, trampled Florida’s laws and deprived Terri Schiavo of her retained rights, they are simply not paying attention. Disability and Eldercare advocates need to be calling for his immediate impeachment.

Judge Greer Obstructing Justice

Terri Schiavo and her family flagrantly denied due process by probate judge

To: National Desk

Clearwater, FL., March 03 /Covenant News Wire Service/ — On February 28, 2005, the parents of Terri Schiavo were informed, through their Attorney David Gibbs, III that Judge George Greer of Pinellas-Pasco’s Sixth Judicial Circuit has denied, without access to hearing, motions filed by Terri Schiavo’s immediate family for

Updated neurological evaluations based on new MRI testing protocols;

A motion to compel the deposition of Michael Schiavo;

A petition for extraordinary authority to provide Terri Schiavo with updated rehabilitative protocols;

A petition for divorce, citing open adultery on the part of Terri Schiavo’s husband and guardian;

An objection to the guardian’s annual guardianship plan ;

A motion to remove Michael Schiavo as guardian, citing his failure to comply with Florida Law mandated guardianship requirements. This motion dates back to November of 2002, but the court has never ruled on it.

Judge Greer has stated that he will only consider motions from Terri’s family as they relate to the death process, which include but are not limited to a motion to allow Terri Schiavo to die at home instead of a Hospice facility, a motion for a Florida burial, and a motion allowing her immediate family uninterrupted access to her throughout the death process.

The Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation finds the actions of Judge Greer reprehensible and a clear denial of the due process rights afforded to Terri Schiavo under Federal and Florida law.

With new medical diagnosis protocols and new levels of rehabilitation protocols, Terri Schiavo’s adjudicated condition of ‘persistent vegetative state’ is no longer equitable and any responsible jurist would eagerly recognize and accommodate more thorough means of determining the disabled woman’s true condition – a condition that remains in great dispute.

Additionally, the Foundation finds the behavior of Judge Greer an absolute obstruction of due process for Terri Schiavo by his refusal to hold the guardian accountable for violation of Florida’s guardian laws. The guardian has spent Terri Schiavo’s medical fund on representing his own legal interests, has denied her necessary medical services, lives in open adultery with his girlfriend and their two children, has petitioned the courts to cremate Terri immediately upon her death and has repeatedly and flagrantly failed to comply with Florida Statutes that mandate the terms of guardianship. Judge Greer couldn’t be bothered with those details so long as Terri Schiavo’s death is a guaranteed outcome.

Statement of Pamela Hennessy, Media Representative of the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation: Never in my life have I seen a judge so afraid of the truth. Why is it that admitted criminals are protected to every reasonable measure of law, but our disabled and vulnerable citizens are discarded by the courts as unworthy lives?

17 Doctors call for new tests for Terri Schiavo

New testing and therapeutic methods asked for by family, doctors agree

To: National Desk

Clearwater, FL., March 05 /Covenant News Wire Service/ — Attorneys for Bob and Mary Schindler have filed 17 affidavits in support of their motion asking Judge Greer to allow medical evaluations be performed on Terri in light of recent advances in medical technologies.

The affidavits are from neurologists, physicians and other experts in the medical field. They are urging that Terri be retested based on the fact that new evaluation and therapeutic technologies can significantly impact brain damaged and disabled persons. Many of them have stated that there is a strong likelihood that Terri is in a minimally conscious state.

More affidavits are expected to be filed next week in support of the Schindler’s motion. As of this writing, the following have submitted affidavits:

Bible Study Online

Bible History The fascinating story of how we got the Bible in its present form actually starts thousands of years ago, as briefly outlined in our Timeline of Bible Translation History. As a background study, we recommend that you first review our discussion of the Pre-Reformation History of the Bible from 1,400 B.C. to 1,400 A.D., which covers the transmission of the scripture through the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, and the 1,000 years of the Dark & Middle Ages when the Word was trapped in only Latin.

The KJV vs. Other Bible Translations Controversy The King James version was translated from the ‘Textus Receptus’ or ‘received text’, that is, the majority of Greek manuscripts which agree with each other and have been accepted through the centuries. The variations among the majority text are very minor, but “the remaining handful of manuscripts are as diverse as dogs and dragons” according to G.A.Ripling (New Age Bible Versions).

Blue Letter Bible Project An in-depth study of God’s Word through an on-line interactive reference library, co-sponsored by Koinonia House and Sowing Circle.

Reformation Study Bible Widely considered one of the best tools available for Bible study and previously only available in the New King James translation, The Reformation Study Bible has been updated to the readable and accurate English Standard Version (ESV). This foundational resource was created by more than fifty scholars and features thousands of in-depth study notes, 96 theological articles, 19 in-text maps, and 12 charts to help you understand the Bible better. This is the study Bible for the next generation of reformers. (American Vision’s Online Store, Hardback, 1948 pages)

The 1599 Geneva Bible, Rediscover America’s Greatest Treasure! When the Pilgrims arrived in the New World in 1620, they brought along supplies, a consuming passion to advance the Kingdom of Christ, and the Word of God. Clearly, their most precious cargo was the Bible—specifically, the 1599 Geneva Bible. All but forgotten in our day, this version of the Bible was the most widely read and influential English Bible of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Full story…

Learn Hebrew Welcome to the Learn Hebrew Site! The site is very easy to use. There are 46 learning topics to choose from with over 1,700 Hebrew words and phrases. Additional topics may be added in the future.

Jewish Encyclopedia This website contains the complete contents of the 12-volume Jewish Encyclopedia, which was originally published between 1901-1906. The Jewish Encyclopedia, which recently became part of the public domain, contains over 15,000 articles and illustrations.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy was designed from its inception (September 1995) as a dynamic reference work. In a dynamic reference work, each entry is maintained and kept up to date by an expert or group of experts in the field.

Spurgeon’s Sermons Sermons written by The Prince of Preachers, Charles Haddon Spurgeon. The sermons are a part of an immense number of sermons from the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit by this Baptist preacher.

Christian Classics Ethereal Library Classic Christian books in electronic format, selected for your edification. There is enough good reading material here to last you a lifetime, if you give each work the time it deserves!

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved Have you ever wondered why one disciple of Jesus was singled out in the Bible as the one “whom Jesus loved”? A new book called The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved takes a closer look at this “other disciple” and the special role that he played in the life of Jesus.

The Tertullian Project A collection of material ancient and modern about the ancient Christian Latin writer Tertullian and his writings.

The Results of Christian Activism Bigger Government, Deficits, Wars Without End By Bob StrodtbeckThe Covenant News ~ May 12, 2008

“They have set up kings, but not by Me; They have appointed princes, but I did not know it. With their silver and gold they have made idols for themselves,…How long will they be incapable of innocence?…For they sow the wind, and they reap the whirlwind….” Hosea 8: 4, 5, 7

I have a great fascination for people who believe that because we live in America and that they claim to be Christian and that they can somehow wrap Biblical language around their decisions, actions, and attitudes, that all the indicators that foretell serious social, political, and economic disasters are suddenly going to disappear like a bad dream.

Or else we’re just going to be raptured and the tribulation will proceed without us.

To whit, might I borrow from a great guru from the athletic world, Lee Corso, by intoning, “Not so fast!!!”

It seems that so much of what we are facing as a country has come because those who claim to be Christian have not lived with integrity or demanded the same from people who have solicited their favor. Consider that, according to the 2000 census, 76.5 percent of the population considers itself to be Christian. Certainly a nation that has more than three quarters of its population claiming to believe essentially the same thing would not suffer from the widespread social conditions that violate those beliefs.

Usually when the terms “Christian” and “social conditions” are brought together, thoughts immediately turn to condemnations of sexual issues, such as extramarital sexual activity, abortion, homosexuality, divorce and the collapse of the American family. Although those phenomena have caused their share of problems, perhaps the greatest damage we Christians have caused to America’s culture has come through our materialism, greed and political myopia.

Consider what we have allowed to happen to America’s working middle class. Personal savings rates are hovering around negative territory, banks have allowed loan applicants to misrepresent their ability to pay back loans, credit card companies thrive on encouraging consumer debt, and the false promises of free trade and open immigration are destroying the ability of families to provide for their needs with their work.

Our national economic plight pales in comparison to the manipulation by the political system we, as Christians, have allowed against ourselves and our neighbors. Remember how the conservative Republicans promised to downsize government, balance budgets, and restore constitutional limits to the federal government way back in 1994? When Republicans won majorities in both the House and the Senate in 1994, the federal debt was $4.8 trillion, today, after 12 years of their tight-fisted, conservative control of government spending, the federal debt is $9.3 trillion. Much of the increase in spending has been driven by the War Against International Terrorism to make the world safe for democracy, but our support for that war has been cajoled through a web of lies that has resulted in the deaths of a growing number of our brothers and sisters.

How can those who claim to be Christian in full confidence ask God’s blessing on America when we, as a nation, consider labor to be little more than an entry on a corporate ledger to be reduced? Don’t we realize that as work becomes less and less valuable to employers that parents need to spend more and more time earning the wages that can sustain home, family, and children? Isn’t the work that makes the machines, appliances, and trinkets that allows modern life to be so comfortable as honorable as the management that devises methods to make those machines profitable? Does the advertising executive provide more to an economic system than the blue collar laborer who supplies the items he makes attractive?

And at what point did supporting liars in their quest for and to hold to power become a Christian mission? Can we at last admit that, in view of the historical record, the Contract with America, by the rhetorical mastermind Newt Gingrich, seems to be nothing more than a shell game to create a voting block and hold to it with promises of delivering on its agenda…someday? When did Christians measure their insight by the willingness to follow Utopian wishes built upon using military intimidation to establish a global hegemony?

America is facing serious political, economic, and cultural challenges and the 76 percent of the population that calls itself Christian cannot disavow its role in the turmoil. The first step just might be in admitting we’ve supported and taken part in the phenomena that have put us where we are and begin acting with integrity to what we claim to believe.

Only one Biblical moral principle applies to the constitutional offices throughout America’s government. That principle is found in the Old Testament book, Deuteronomy, in chapter 23: 21-23, “When you make a vow to the Lord your God, you shall not delay to pay it, for it would be sin in you, and the Lord your God will surely require it of you. However, if you refrain from vowing, it would not be sin in you. You shall be careful to perform what goes out from your lips, just as you have voluntarily vowed to the Lord your God, what you have promised.”

Article VI of the US Constitution requires, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;…” The Presidential oath requires, “…I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

For the respect of the secularist among us, Article VI also states, “…no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” Consequently the judgment that God places upon one who violates a vow is a matter acceptance of Christian orthodoxy, and since all government officials in the US are required to vow to support the constitution, any Christian who violates the constitutional oath believes he/she is calling forth Divine judgment upon his/her loathsome soul.

Someone should tell the president.

Someone should also tell Dr. James Dobson.

Dr. Dobson recently challenged Democrat presidential nominee, Barrak Obama, for misapplying scripture and having a, “a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution.” As for the scripture part, Dr. Dobson would have a hared time finding any American politician who has ever applied the Bible properly, and if Dr. Dobson is going to challenge Obama for his interpretation of the Constitution, he would do well to assault the entire Democrat-Republican political system—with the exception of Ron Paul.

Politically active Christians seem more preoccupied with using the power of government to enact their various agendas than they are with restoring the proper balance of powers that restrain illegitimate absorption of power. They have forgotten that the original temptation was that both Adam and Eve would have the knowledge and power of God if they ate of the tree of knowledge. Consequently, 21st century Christians have learned little more than first week humans.

America’s federal government, as established in the US Constitution, manages a union of states from which power to control or veto the federal government’s actions resides within the will of the state legislatures to do so. Consider that when the Constitution was ratified the state legislatures chose the Senate (Article I, Section 3). Through the Senate, the states subsequently held influence over impeachment (ibid.), ratification of treaties and trade agreements with foreign countries, approval of presidential appointees, and passage on the establishment of federal courts (Article II, Section 2).

Congressional districts and the rules for electing representatives are to be set by state legislatures. The Constitution even puts the state legislatures in control over how electors to the Electoral College are to be chosen (Article II, Section 1). Note need be taken, especially as Dr. Dobson is wringing his hands over the theological and constitutional views of Mr. Obama, that America has a President of the United States, not a President of the Citizens of the United States. Maybe the two year duration of the presidential campaign would be dramatically reduced if the state legislatures reasserted their control over the selection of electors to the Electoral College.

In fact, until 1909 the federal government operating revenues from state legislatures (leaving tariffs on imported goods the only source of direct taxation by the federal government), but then the 16th Amendment allowed the federal government to bypass our state capitals to take up residence in our pockets through the income tax.

Except for changes in the selection of the Senate, which came in 1913 by the 17th Amendment, and the adoption of the income tax, state legislatures can still hold a great amount of influence over what comes out of the federal government.

The quadrennial fear mongering over how either the next Republican or Democrat president is going to destroy the republic really pales in comparison with the real damage caused by the abject ignorance with which the voting public understands the law that is designed to restrict the power of government. With all due respect to Dr. Dobson, he could devote quite a bit of time informing his supporters and listeners to the text of the US Constitution and how the balance of powers between the states and federal government could help to limit the damage one individual president could cause to the nation and its culture.

Instead, it seems, anyone with a following uses their influence to support a bipolar political system that has converted a union of free states into little more than a populace to be fattened for a political slaughter every four years.

Dr. Dobson has done much to bring attention to the importance of marriage and families to the stability of this country, and his efforts are supported here. The strength of a marriage is no greater than the honor of husbands and wives for their vows—just as the commitment to public service of an American government officials is no better than their vow to, “…preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.”

I know that Dr. Dobson would not advocate that a couple enter into marriage without proper counseling on the commitment so involved. However his eagerness to critique the constitutional insight of one candidate without doing the same of the entire political system and eschew an in depth review of the Constitutional institutions and principles is akin to presiding over a wedding while allowing the groom to keep his mistress waiting in the parking lot with her engine running.

I Have The Power to Lead The Nation to Ruin By Bob StrodtbeckThe Covenant News ~ July 14, 2008

Every four years I suddenly come into possession of some incredible powers, according to acquaintances that fall into my social circles.

I can single-handedly determine whether or not the United States of America will proudly move forward into the, “broad sunlit uplands,” of its Providential destiny, or collapse into a terror-ridden, third world cinder on the ash heap of history.

This power has come to me because I have voiced my disgust with choosing, “the lessor of two evils.”

You see, I have not voted for either a Republican or Democrat on any level of government since 1992. When the future of the world’s last surviving super power is left to the whims of my vote, many in my social circles have let me know that my various votes for Pat Buchanan, Michael Peroutka, and this year’s alternative party choice between Libertarian Bob Barr or Constitutional Party Nominee Chuck Baldwin is akin to allowing the anti-Christ to rise to power and destroy the American dream.

To some extent this has much to do with the social circles in which I find myself. I am white, middle-class (although less so than eight years ago), socially conservative, and Christian. That is the Republican profile. It does not matter that Republicans, although promising for years to restore constitutional limits to government, balance budgets, and eschew nation-building in favor of a, “…more humble foreign policy,” betrayed all of those goals to put America in a precarious social, economic and foreign policy position, the state of the nation will only become worse by my vote for a party not Republican.

The duty on my social group is not entirely unlike that put upon black, emerging middle-class, socially-conscientious, civil rights focused voters who must vote Democrat. Although I am not party to those social circles as a routine, I do know that Democrats have controlled the legislative flow from Washington during 42 of the last 54 years and their disdain for government rivals mine.

This brings me to a fascinating observation: It seems clear that neither the Republicans or Democrats are really serving the interests or needs of the major voting blocks upon which they depend for their access to elected offices. If this is so, isn’t the willful support of these two voting blocks actually enabling officials of those parties to persist in their lies and abuse of their constitutional duties? Furthermore, if those who criticize me for potentially ruining the country are actually bringing ruin by supporting a corrupt, dysfunctional political system, is not withholding my vote from that system an act of civic responsibility that can actually begin a political restoration of the nation?

While the two party political system is very well ensconced throughout government due to its long history of dominating elected offices, it maintains its hold on government by largely unquestioned support of major voting blocks. If individuals that make up these voting blocks see that their interests are only being used to garner their election support so the officials who win elections can pay fealty to the diktats of the Washington power system (so they can win re-election and earn access to the congressional pension and have a future career as a lobbyist), they might begin questioning that support and decide the system does not deserve it.

What would happen if reliable members of the Christian Right and the Civil Rights Left actually looked at the fact that the Republicans and Democrats pursue the same agenda and decided to abandon those parties or create new ones to compete with the established order? I don’t see that having a new political organization that questions the wisdom of allowing the Federal Reserve Bank to create money to be a bad thing. Nor is it considered here to have some thoughtful dissent with America’s foreign entanglements, international military presence in 130 countries, or the amount of tax dollars that are spent on war matériel when the dollar is so horribly devalued.

Take it from one who has proudly abandoned the two party system for more than a decade; the withdrawal of my votes from Republicans or Democrats have not kept those two parties from pursuing what they tell you is best for this country and at no time during my self-imposed exile have members of those parties pursued any policy with which I am impressed. I don’t expect that my decision to vote for parties other than Democrat or Republican will diminish the control those parties have over public policy for quite some time. Therefore, for those who believe that the vote I keep from the, “lessor of two evils” will chase America down the road to ruin can be assured that the future of our country is cradled safely in the wise hands of Democrats and Republicans.

Leaders Of The Political System Serve Leaders Of The Political System By Bob StrodtbeckThe Covenant News ~ December 4, 2009

An important fact that we all need to face is that the Republican/Democrat political system that controls access to the government is going to do whatever it takes to hold onto its power.

This means continued wars, continued expansion of government influence, and continuation of policies that diminish the value of our currency, labor, and assets. How has the War Against International Terrorism benefited the nation? Why do officials in the government believe that, despite the huge debt it has amassed ($12.1 trillion as of this writing and over $70 trillion in unfunded liabilities), it can efficiently and economically administer the practice of medicine? How does fear mongering over specious environmental crises and crushing regulations that inhibit development of productive industries relieve growing unemployment?

The answer to these and countless other questions regarding the actions of American government is that they only serve to help Democrats and Republicans hold on power. Democrats have kept their supporters in tow for decades by promising to use the power of government by using public revenues to correct social iniquities-or redistribution of wealth programs. Republicans have opposed those notions, but not done anything to stop them. They, on the other hand, have found that their conservative bases are generally attracted to the idea of using government power to go out and kick some butts now and then. Therefore, we have a never ending war for an unachievable goal involving us in the most provincial of rivalries around the world.

It seems that the consequences of inept and corrupt leaders are going to affect most, if not all, of us. The suggestion that common Americans can organize to stop the usurpation of their freedoms and property is here considered to be absurd. The American government has been abrogating our freedoms for, according to some thinkers, for most of two centuries. Standing up to the government as it has reached a point of irresistible power would require a common and spontaneous cause that could result in a political upheaval. The greatest hope is that such would limit violence and unseat those who currently control the government-not unlike what was seen in the former Soviet Union in 1991.

That political overthrow, however, was directed against a single party which could not escape the consequences of its ineptitude.

Americans have been split into two, seemingly competing herds, though. Since 1992 these herds have been skillfully manipulated into believing that changing the party in power would restore the nation to its past glory. During the Clinton years, the Conservative/Republican (C/R) herd believed that it could preserve our freedoms from the incompetence and meddling of the Liberal/Democrats (L/D). It is interesting to note that, although the C/R herd could lead a monumental political change in Congress in the 1994 mid-term election due to the failures of the Clinton presidency, it could not engineer an election victory over Mr. Clinton.

Finally, though, the C/R herd ascended to political control over the presidency and both houses of Congress in 2000 with promises of “conservative” government and “…more modest foreign policy”. Of course 9/11 changed everything and made global statists out of most parsimonious politicians on the planet (save for a patriot named Ron Paul). Through the fumbling and bumbling and inarticulating of America’s War Against International Terrorism by President George W. Bush, the L/D branch made headway against C/R majorities and reclaimed control of the Congress in 2006. Coincidentally, the L/D’s could not electorally unseat the leader who led C/R’s to defeat.

The cycle is starting again, C/R’s are waiting in the wings to take advantage of the mishandling of the nation’s affairs by the L/D political authorities. President Barrack Obama came to power promising to draw down the wars in the Middle East, instead he is devoting more resources and manpower to both fronts, has expanded our aggression into Pakistan, and is being pulled into a confrontation with Iran. Economically he has nearly tripled the deficits of the Bush presidency which more doubled and nearly quadrupled the deficits of the Clinton administration.

With each election cycle too many adults have been trained to wait on the side lines until their favorites can be restored to power. After each election those same adults feel the dread of a newlywed who has spontaneously decided to take marital vows with a stranger during a wild night in Las Vegas.

Just like the consequences of a bad marital decision comes to those who so lightly consider their vows, we too are facing disastrous consequences to our national future largely because of our partisan traditions (let us not forget that the service of elected officials also starts with a vow to honor the U.S. Constitution). The political system dictating our government is not going to turn the ship of state around because those at the top of it don’t have to-too many of us are willing to support it in spite of its incompetence.

The affects of our incompetent and corrupt political system are already undeniably apparent. The problems we face are deep-seated and many including the collapse of the dollar, our inability to support our foreign adventures, the forfeiture of our productive-industrial economic base in favor of a service-consumer base, and the legal-regulatory stranglehold on our freedom to resurrect labor and production as the foundation to the economy.

As American continues to become crippled by these unintended consequences, the leaders of the political system and its supporters have chosen denial over facing its ineptitude. Are we going to come to our senses and stop denying that the problems are the result of the party we reject? Can we have the courage to choose intellectual and political freedom from a system that is acting more and more aggressively to enslave us? Do we still have a choice?

Bible Study Online

Bible History The fascinating story of how we got the Bible in its present form actually starts thousands of years ago, as briefly outlined in our Timeline of Bible Translation History. As a background study, we recommend that you first review our discussion of the Pre-Reformation History of the Bible from 1,400 B.C. to 1,400 A.D., which covers the transmission of the scripture through the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, and the 1,000 years of the Dark & Middle Ages when the Word was trapped in only Latin.

The KJV vs. Other Bible Translations Controversy The King James version was translated from the ‘Textus Receptus’ or ‘received text’, that is, the majority of Greek manuscripts which agree with each other and have been accepted through the centuries. The variations among the majority text are very minor, but “the remaining handful of manuscripts are as diverse as dogs and dragons” according to G.A.Ripling (New Age Bible Versions).

Blue Letter Bible Project An in-depth study of God’s Word through an on-line interactive reference library, co-sponsored by Koinonia House and Sowing Circle.

Reformation Study Bible Widely considered one of the best tools available for Bible study and previously only available in the New King James translation, The Reformation Study Bible has been updated to the readable and accurate English Standard Version (ESV). This foundational resource was created by more than fifty scholars and features thousands of in-depth study notes, 96 theological articles, 19 in-text maps, and 12 charts to help you understand the Bible better. This is the study Bible for the next generation of reformers. (American Vision’s Online Store, Hardback, 1948 pages)

The 1599 Geneva Bible, Rediscover America’s Greatest Treasure! When the Pilgrims arrived in the New World in 1620, they brought along supplies, a consuming passion to advance the Kingdom of Christ, and the Word of God. Clearly, their most precious cargo was the Bible—specifically, the 1599 Geneva Bible. All but forgotten in our day, this version of the Bible was the most widely read and influential English Bible of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Full story…

Learn Hebrew Welcome to the Learn Hebrew Site! The site is very easy to use. There are 46 learning topics to choose from with over 1,700 Hebrew words and phrases. Additional topics may be added in the future.

Jewish Encyclopedia This website contains the complete contents of the 12-volume Jewish Encyclopedia, which was originally published between 1901-1906. The Jewish Encyclopedia, which recently became part of the public domain, contains over 15,000 articles and illustrations.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy was designed from its inception (September 1995) as a dynamic reference work. In a dynamic reference work, each entry is maintained and kept up to date by an expert or group of experts in the field.

Spurgeon’s Sermons Sermons written by The Prince of Preachers, Charles Haddon Spurgeon. The sermons are a part of an immense number of sermons from the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit by this Baptist preacher.

Christian Classics Ethereal Library Classic Christian books in electronic format, selected for your edification. There is enough good reading material here to last you a lifetime, if you give each work the time it deserves!

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved Have you ever wondered why one disciple of Jesus was singled out in the Bible as the one “whom Jesus loved”? A new book called The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved takes a closer look at this “other disciple” and the special role that he played in the life of Jesus.

The Tertullian Project A collection of material ancient and modern about the ancient Christian Latin writer Tertullian and his writings.

The pro-life movement defends the principle of protecting the right-to-life for all people. As America’s post-modern culture attracts more individuals with the allure of convenience and relativism, the pro-life principle covers an increasing number of individuals from embryos created in a laboratory to incapacitated geriatrics in nursing homes.

The national debate over abortion has kept a high profile for most of the nearly three decades that Americans have been erroneously told that killing babies in the womb is protected by the U.S. Constitution. The focus of the debate has been on the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, which asserts a penumbra right to privacy in the Bill of Rights entitles women to access abortion procedures.

Over the years that the national debate over abortion has been measured by polls and propaganda America has been dragged into a relativistic culture that endorses killing babies in the womb and applauds scientists creating babies in the lab. Meanwhile governments are increasingly subjected to the desires of wealthy international corporations or the whims of unrestrained judicial branches which show an interest in both.

It is not the advocates of abortion rights that have forwarded this lurch into social destruction, however, but the pro-lifers who have wasted 30 years pursuing an agenda rather than fighting for principles that have defined American liberty.

The U.S. Constitution establishes multi-leveled government with defined responsibilities so the nation would not be subjected to the whims of power-lusting individuals. This balance of powers is not limited to the branches of national government outlined in the Constitution, but includes the state governments that are referred to in Article I, Section 3, clause one (the selection of the Senate was originally under the authority of state legislatures) and in the tenth amendment.

Roe v. Wade did not so much create a right out of thin air, but was an usurpation of state legislative authority by the federal courts. This expansion of federal judicial power is now so broad that any state or local law can be struck down by judicial fiat. The power grab by the courts is a clear violation of its limits to hear only “…cases in law and equity, arising under this (the U.S.) Constitution….” This means the federal courts have the authority to hear cases regarding laws written by the U.S. Congress and enforced by the president.

The pro-life movement, however, has been preoccupied with attempting to influence the national government to support its agenda when it needed to educate the general public of the dangers of a central government taking power unto itself. In pursuit of this unfruitful strategy, pro-lifers are busy raising support for the reelection campaign of President Bush in spite of his lukewarm action on pro-life principles.

Pro-life support for Mr. Bush is creating more threats to the structure of constitutional government than even Roe. Mr. Bush is an unflinching internationalist who seems to have no problems eliminating American borders and converting the military into a rapid deployment force for political and economic agendas that are poorly defined and executed without a shred of constitutional support. His agenda focuses on unconstitutional expansions of federal authority into education, medical practice, and church missions. He has further expanded executive control over the use of lands that was initiated through executive orders written by Bill Clinton and his lust for fast track trading authority for trade agreements has subverted congressional oversight in relations with trade partners.

Pro-lifers are willing to accept these abuses of power because Mr. Bush will use their politically correct clichés at opportune moments. This concession on the part of pro-lifers, though, is in absolute defiance of the major principle that the framers of the Constitution used to develop legal limits on federal office holders – that is that human nature is self-serving and continually seeking personal aggrandizement.

The pro-life movement seems to be committed to gauging its influence by endorsements it gets from national political celebrities, but time has proven that those platitudes won’t stop babies from being killed. The movement’s support for the current president might even help to finish the work of destroying the U.S. Constitution that was so hideously forwarded by Roe.

Since 1993 Bob Strodtbeck has been writing commentaries for The Apopka Chief, a news weekly circulated in a community ten miles north of Orlando. His analyses investigate a wide range of topics from what he calls a “Christian pragmatic” view – that is to say, he considers that human interactions are largely driven by the human instinct toward self-service, which is traditionally known as sin. This perspective has given Bob great liberty to criticize governmental officials from both parties upon the standards of constitutional laws they swear to uphold and review cultural and economic phenomena from moral standards defined in the Bible. Bob currently lives in Orlando with his bride Pam and children Charlotte and Richard. He may be reached for comment here.

Bush’s Influence on Principled Voters Is to Guide Them to Abandon Their Principles By Bob StrodtbeckThe Covenant News ~ December 28, 2005

Christianity is not, nor can it be, utopian. This is due simply to the fact that Christianity is a belief that humans, both as individuals and a species, are separated from God through a sinful nature. According to holy writ the wages of sin is death and, in their mortal state, humans require salvation from eternal judgment through blood sacrifice. That blood sacrifice was paid once and for all by Jesus’ death on the cross.

Not only was the mission of Christ offered by God as a remedy from the blight of human nature, but the entire Bible is a record of failure brought by human works. This flawed record begins in Eden. It was amplified in the flood of Noah and continued into Babel. It followed Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as they attempted to put their stamp on God’s plan for establishing his own chosen race.

God’s efforts to provide a select land for His chosen people were further inhibited by the disobedience, idolatry and cowardice of those subjects. After God allowed them to occupy the land chosen for them, they proceeded to neglect the commands God made to occupy their land, subjected themselves to continual war, allowed their leaders to indulge in various self aggrandizing pursuits and devote the country to destructive war and alliances.

It did not take many years for Israel to pass from God’s protection to a divided and prostrate gathering of people living in a land ripe for the taking by any and every nation that could dispatch an army. Along the way those who were born into God’s chosen bloodline were busy violating his moral restrictions, killing or torturing those who spoke for Him, and finding ways to make themselves appealing to their various captors.

Later, according to those who kept the records of the early Christian Church, followers of the new way established by Jesus Christ were troubled by greed, heresy, carnality, and factionalism. All the while those attracted to the new beliefs were persecuted as a threat to the various governments and economic systems that demanded absolute fealty.

Consequently, the heaven so sought for by all of us is, according to the Bible, only available after we die–or until God returns to cleanse the world with His final judgment. Utopians, however, believe that perfection can be achieved during this existence if only we apply the right formula. Such a belief is not dissimilar to the Serpent’s appeal to Eve in the Garden that, to paraphrase, we can all be as gods.

It, therefore, should be of no small concern to Christian supporters of President Bush that he has verbalized utopian faith in the purifying influences of democracy. “If the peoples of (the Middle East) are permitted to choose their own destiny,” so declared the President at the 20th anniversary celebration of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) on October 6, “and advance by their own energy and by their participation as free men and women, then the extremists will be marginalized, and the flow of violent radicalism to the rest of the world will slow, and eventually end.”

The President’s trust in the salvific influences of democracy is, by no means, limited to a single speech this past October. During his inaugural address this past January, which was little more than an ode to freedom, he declared, “So, it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.” More recently, on December 14 at The International Trade Center in Washington, as part of a concentrated PR campaign to rally public support for the war in Iraq he said, “I strongly believe a democratic Iraq is a crucial part of our strategy to defeat the terrorists, because only democracy can bring freedom and reconciliation to Iraq, and peace to this troubled part of the world.”

For Christians to embrace President Bush in spite of his unrepentant faith in an utopian world founded upon democratic practices is a clear departure from Biblical and historical fact as well as from Christian doctrine regarding human depravity. The President’s democratic utopianism is not his only departure from the application of Christian restraint on the exercise of power. His decision to invade Iraq was preceded by a public campaign to persuade the country to support it. The moral quandary this should cause Christians is that the campaign was based upon false intelligence that some have claimed proves administrative incompetence at best and bold prevarication at worse.

Government and military officials, under the President’s authority, have violated laws regarding torture, leaking the names of covert intelligence agents, and the issuance of unauthorized wiretaps on American citizens. Furthermore the agenda of the President and his party not only violates Constitutional limits the power of the federal government, but defies principles the president’s party claimed to support during its march to win governing majorities in Congress and in most of the state legislatures throughout the country.

Note need be made of the fact that although candidates supported by Christian voters are clearly in an ascendancy in America’s political power structures, Christian influence over the culture seems to be receding to a low ebb. Families continue to break apart under moral and financial strain, personal debt is spiraling out of control, and non marital sexual conduct is the national pastime. In the meantime the government that has been established by Christian activism is accelerating the deficit spending that is ruining the currency, and embracing trade, labor, and immigration policies that is destroying America’s middle class families and work ethic.

During his aforementioned speech to the NED, President Bush also declared, “By standing for the hope and freedom of others, we make our own freedom more secure.” Someone should make the president aware that both our freedom and security are under continual threat of humans who fall to the temptation to use their power for personal purposes.

Bob Strodtbeck has been writing commentaries for The Apopka Chief, a news weekly circulated in a community ten miles north of Orlando. His analyses investigate a wide range of topics from what he calls a “Christian pragmatic” view – that is to say, he considers that human interactions are largely driven by the human instinct toward self-service, which is traditionally known as sin. This perspective has given Bob great liberty to criticize governmental officials from both parties upon the standards of constitutional laws they swear to uphold and review cultural and economic phenomena from moral standards defined in the Bible. Bob currently lives in Orlando with his bride Pam and children Charlotte and Richard. He may be reached for comment here.

Before I make my appeal for your united stand to preserve the union, please allow me to give you a review of my background before you label me as a liberal, communist or subversive. You see, I spent most of my life supporting your campaigns and your stated principles of governing, but left your party out of frustration with what I considered to be your dereliction of duty during the Clinton presidency.

My disenchantment with your party was not caused by your inability to properly deal with the ineptitude of the Clinton Administration, but goes back to how you choked off and killed the populist movement that grew out of the “Contract with America”. During those heady days of 1994-5 when Republican candidates catapulted to congressional majorities and earned control of a majority of state legislatures I believed that conservative thought would begin dissipating power out of Washington, D.C., and begin restoring a federal balance of powers between states and the national government that was intended by the US Constitution. To this end I gravitated toward the message of Pat Buchanan that the American government should serve American citizens, protect the standard of living of the American working middle class, use tariffs to require foreign manufacturers to support the economic system from which they desired to profit, and develop a non interventionist foreign policy that would guard American security without obligating the country to participate in international intrigues.

Those positions, however, were considered to be anathema to party regulars that saw the end of the Cold War to be an opportunity for America to assert itself as the “indispensable nation”. I witnessed your party, in response to Buchanan’s emergence as a front-runner for the 1996 GOP presidential nomination, gather all its resources to choke off the movement he championed and prop up the moribund candidacy of Bob Dole which was little more than a forfeit to the re-election campaign to President Clinton.

Although I did not disassociate myself from the party after the treachery you committed marginalize us “peasants with pitchforks”, I put one foot squarely out the door. I began looking to the vast horizon with the botched impeachment trial of Bill Clinton. I began my stride when there was no indignation over his surprise attack of Bosnia on the eve of the impeachment vote. I finally turned my back on your big tent on April 22, 2000, when the US government conducted the armed kidnapping of Elian Gonzales and the GOP hardly raised a whimper of protest.

I am, at this time, willing to swallow my contempt for the realization that your party, from the highest levels to the newest precinct walker, holds the greatest potential to rescue America from potential and rapid destruction. Only Republicans can appeal to President Bush and his advisers that taking military action against Iran is not in the best interests of this country without appearing partisan or accused of liberal, communistic motivations.

Regardless of what you believe, dear Republicans, of America’s invincibility, the invasion of Iraq has exposed some serious chinks in the American armor. Due to America’s foreign military adventures annual federal deficits have crossed the $400 billion mark throughout the Bush Presidency. The bulk of the resulting $9 trillion federal debt is coming under increasing control of the Chinese government. China, by the way, is managing a rapidly industrializing economy, thanks to corporations moving their production facilities there from America. This industrial growth is making the major owner of American debt a competitor with the US for construction resources and oil. If China wants to gain a competitive edge for those resources, it can easily gain it by calling in the chits it is holding against America’s currency.

Nor is one treasonously cynical to suggest that American society is ill suited to handle the sacrifices required to expand the Iraqi war to another country. America has a consumption-based economy that demands spending. Large-scale war demands saving, production, and rationing. According to the U.S. Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis, the American public last year had a savings rate of negative0.5 percent. Furthermore America has lost manufacturing jobs for the past 42 months running through March 2006.

Please don’t overlook the emerging social conflict that is coming over immigration and employment throughout the nation. If you would review Civil War history you will find that the biggest riot of the war was the New York Draft Riot which drove New York City to the brink of destruction at the onset of the Civil War during July, 1863. The riot was caused by wage competition between labor pools and the demands on residents to meet the call of a nation going to war. Today the immigration debate focuses on wage competition between labor pools and the demands on American citizens that are being required to support the needs of a nation in a boundless war.

I am well aware that contemplating an American assault on Iran satisfies a noble faith that America desires to act preemptively to rescue the world from nuclear weapons proliferation among madmen. Consider, for a moment, though, that we invaded and occupied Iraq to liberate it from violence and oppression. We removed a leader that destroyed cities and tortured political prisoners so as to remove him as a global threat with Weapons of Mass Destruction and connections with Islamic terrorists. In the process of delivering this mission the world has discovered Iraq had no WMD or capabilities to produce them, nor were there were no clear connections between Saddam Hussein and Islamic terrorists. Furthermore, before the American invasion, Iraq under Saddam did not suffer from any terrorist attacks, and pursuant to victory in the War Against International Terrorism America has found it necessary to destroy cities and torture prisoners. This is not a record that inspires confidence among us doubters and makes you who are truly faithful to the occupation appear detached from reality.

Subsequently I am appealing to you, my former partisan cohorts, to please consider the consequences of the last decade of “conservative” government to the nation, of the Iraqi “cakewalk” to America’s international standing and credibility, and then ask the head of your party, President Bush, to restrain himself from rescuing the United States from the wickedness of tyranny and the threat of evil. I am not sure that the nation will be able to survive any more of his, or your party’s heroic acts.

We’re All We’ve Got Let’s Make The Most of It By Bob StrodtbeckThe Covenant News ~ May 4, 2006

We are all we’ve got left.

When you look at the harsh realities of America’s major institutions that influence government and the economy one must come to the harsh reality that America’s tax paying citizens are being left to fend for themselves.

Consider, for a moment, the American political system. Supposedly it is made up of two competing groups; the Republicans and Democrats. The mainstream voter believes that the two parties are scrutinized and held in check by a free press (although most voters believe that the press unfairly represents one of the two parties they support).

What has been avoiding scrutiny, however, is the fact that election campaigning has become a very lucrative and continual industry. In 2006 Republicans and Democrats spent more than $2 billion on the congressional mid-term campaigns and the 2008 presidential campaign started almost immediately after the mid-term ballots were counted. Interestingly the bulk of campaign dollars were spent with the very same media outlets for which news reporters work. Is it possible that those reporters profit from the campaign revenues their employers charge Democrat and Republican candidates? Do the owners of media outlets profit from political advertising revenues? When a media company faces a decision to broadcast the truth or assure that it maintains profitability, is it unreasonable to think that the company will consider truth to be a hindrance to capitalistic gain? Isn’t profit from the free enterprise system the most important truth to preserve as the foundation of our freedom?

The profit motive, after all, is what made this country great.

Before we think that the election campaign industry is a tidy little enterprise between Republicans, Democrats, and the press, it is worthwhile to ponder the source of campaign revenues that are spent with the media. They generally come from the “soft money” corporate contributions that are shoveled into the party in the hundreds of thousands. These same corporate contributors also buy the media ads that keep broadcast outlets in business. Simply put, the three estates of government and the fourth estate of the press are wrapped up in a tidy little package by global capitalists that are continually on the prowl for ever cheaper labor markets to help them grow their profits.

The Global corporate elite and America’s political system no longer see any value in common working Americans. Our expectations that our efforts be valued to the point that they will support our families are anathema to global corporations that once made our land their home. The politicians who buy our votes with the skimmed profits from those corporations will not sacrifice their comfort to serve and protect their oaths of office or the future of the country.

Corporate executives and political celebrities value their wealth, power and status, but they do not value us. They don’t value our families, homes, communities, or even the greatness or opportunities that once defined America. If they did they would not be devoting so much wealth and energy to leave us in the search for new wealth, power, and status in other countries. If our elected representatives had the slightest regard for our American heritage they would not be allowing the destruction of our industry, economy, culture, or identity.

The only ones who care about us is us. Fortunately, though, America was built to be the envy of the world without needing international corporate executives selling us out to find slaves in destitute hell holes. Neither did politicians on the take did raise us up to be admired by the world as a “shining city on a hill”.

We did it—the common working people who only wanted to provide for our own. We are being left behind by those so blessed to have been raptured to the paradise of global wealth and power.

“New Orleans now is abortion free. New Orleans now is Mardi Gras free. New Orleans now is free of Southern Decadence and the sodomites, the witchcraft workers, false religion — it’s free of all of those things now. God simply, I believe, in His mercy purged all of that stuff out of there — and now we’re going to start over again.” –Bill Shanks, pastor of New Covenant Fellowship of New Orleans.

I am writing the following as one who has lived for several years in New Orleans, ministering on the streets and in the community, and as one who has family and friends in the city who have lost much.

In recent years there has been a deliberate attempt by many Christian leaders to improve the public image of Christianity. While this is not entirely a bad thing, at times it can go too far. An example of this is the way that natural disasters and similar tragedies are immediately declared to be innocent of God’s handiwork by so many spokesmen for the Christian community. In some cases I am sure that this is so; accidents happen; God often times simply allows laws of cause and effect to take their course. But, to say such disaster is “out of character for God” is not only inaccurate but is not doing Christianity nor it’s Author any favors.

Noah experienced a move of God in his day when the Lord wiped out the entire population of the earth in the flood. Sodom and Gomorrah were annihilated by fire and brimstone rained down from above. Those who would claim that God wouldn’t cause such a thing as Hurricane Katrina, needn’t dig too deep to find contradiction in their worldview. If you do not believe the Bible, so be it, then let this be the point of our contention, but to say that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who has revealed Himself through His Son, Jesus Christ and the Holy Scriptures, is not capable within the bounds of His character to do such a thing is the height of absurdity. “The Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom”.

It is clear to me as I have traveled extensively all over this nation doing ministry on the streets, that the city of New Orleans is the most depraved in all our society. The city epitomizes the pomp, pride, and hedonistic godlessness that is becoming the character of our nation. Biloxi and Gulfport, on the Mississippi coast, are modeling their cities after much of New Orleans. Their gambling casinos, associated with organized crime, prostitution and exploitation bring an estimated $500,000 in taxes each day for the state! Those casinos do not exist today.

Bourbon Street, the most famous street in New Orleans, full of bars and strip clubs, is a dirty and disgusting cesspool which engulfs its inhabitants in the foulest odors of stale beer and urine. It attracts people from all over the world, culminating in the Mardi Gras celebration, a week of drunkenness and revelry. One of the highlights of Mardi Gras is the exchanging of plastic beads for girls to expose their breasts. A very common scene on Bourbon Street, not just during Mardi Gras, but any night of the week, is a crowd of drunk men surrounding a woman chanting “show your tits” until the girl exposes her breasts to the crowd. Over a million people come into New Orleans for Mardi Gras every year, many of whom are college students who take these obscene practices back to their own cities and towns. Like a cancer New Orleans has spread her disease to much of our nation.

“Girls Gone Wild”, as well as a host of similar offshoots, has its origins in New Orleans.

Southern Decadence, one of the largest and most vulgar “gay” celebrations in the world, finds its home in New Orleans every Labor Day weekend (interestingly enough, Katrina made landfall just 2 days before Decadence was scheduled to begin), as the city rolls out the red carpet to prostitute itself for the revenue generated by such depravity. In fact, a huge percentage of the city’s income stems from its “parties” in the French Quarter every week.

The city’s political system has been well known to be one of the most corrupt in the nation for years; this has been well documented with numerous city and state officials currently behind bars.

New Orleans has been the nation’s murder capitol multiple times. Thus far this year, they were again the nation’s leader in murders. Along with this are epidemic problems with drug addiction, crime and poverty.

Voodoo, witchcraft, and the occult are popular attractions in the city. A major annual music concert titles itself the “Voodoo Festival”.

New Orleans is a city full of crime, violence, corruption and perversion that influences the world with its seductive allurements. It is a city where the awful fruit of sin is keenly evident with the crime, poverty and brokenness. Yet, they continue to suppress the truth in their unrighteousness; unwilling to repent, unwilling to humble themselves and turn away from these destructive things.

The damage that was created by Katrina is nothing compared to the damage that sin in all its fullness has been creating in New Orleans and through its influence every day, year after year. When we see a young couple gruesomely killed by a drunk driver who thought it was ok to “get wasted” and drive home, I see Bourbon Street and the flood waters. When I hear of a family being ripped apart because of the sexual addiction of an unfaithful husband who thought “a little fun” was ok, I think of the French Quarter and the flood waters. When I see a young kid get shot to death while “slangin” crack on his corner because poverty and crime are all he has known, I think of New Orleans and I think of the flood waters. When I see a teenage girl going into a clinic where a doctor is ripping out of her womb, piece by piece a little human being created in Gods image, thinking it is her “choice”, I think of New Orleans and I think of the flood waters. When will our nation awake? When will we hear the cry of our Lord to “Love God with all our hearts, and to Love our neighbor as ourselves”?

Sin has consequences. This was true yesterday, it is true today and it will be true tomorrow. God has shown His mighty hand and His displeasure, not just to New Orleans but to our entire nation. Will we hear, is the great question of this hour.

God is the governor among the nations (Psalm 22:27-28); therefore, He is “a God of judgment” (Isa. 30:18) when man breaks His Law. When God does act, it is always in terms of His Law, His eternal standard: “Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail will sweep away the refuge of lies…” (Isa. 28:17).

God’s judgments – misunderstood God’s rule over the earth doesn’t operate according to our expectations. “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts” (Isa. 55:9). Scripturally, judgment is treated as a “strange work” and “strange act” of God (Isa. 28:21) – strange because there should be no need for judgment since God provides adequate opportunity to repent, and because God must assemble extraordinary instruments of judgment (e.g., He is said to “hire a razor” when He calls upon the Assyrians to come in judgment against Israel in Isa. 7:20).

God’s judgments – always certain God’s graciousness in delaying His judgment often gives rise to the mocking question, “Where is the God of judgment?” (Mal. 2:17). God’s forbearance is intended to provide opportunity to obey His laws. In Rev. 2:21, God says of Jezebel that “I gave her space to repent of her fornication, but she repented not.” Too often forbearance is treated with contempt and misinterpreted as license to continue in disobedience. “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Eccl. 8:11). God waited five centuries before dropping the hammer on Israel. God warned His people (Lev. 26:33-36) that if they violated the land Sabbath law requiring the fields to go unworked every seventh year, the nation would be cast out and scattered and “the land shall enjoy her Sabbaths.” When Israel began to violate these ordinances, God didn’t appear to follow through with judgment. But a suspended sentence isn’t an acquittal. In 2 Chron. 36:21 the long-promised deportation (to Babylon and beyond) finally occurred and the emptied land rested for seventy years – the amount of Sabbaths that Israel had refused to honor over the course of half a millennium. God is never mocked.

God’s judgments – our prerogative to invoke or deflect In an era when in countless churches “the law is slacked” (Hab. 1:4) by contemporary Christian theology, where the “great things of His Law are regarded as a strange thing” (Hos. 8:12) by pastors, where His Law is displaced by the “teaching of the precepts of men” (Mark 7:7-9, Matt. 15:9), we confront the warning of Psalm 119:126 – “It is time for Thee, O Lord, to work: for they have made void Thy Law.” Although Christians ought not to loosen even the least of the jots and tittles of God’s commandments or to teach men so (Matt. 5:19), many Christians today do exactly that. National decline inevitably follows such a profound spiritual decline and God begins His work of judgment in an unexpected place: “the house of God” (1 Pet. 4:17). We must recover the faith of America’s founding fathers, who understood the Scriptures and the unceasing relevance of the entirety of God’s Law far better than our current paperback-ridden, sound-bite-happy generation. If we apply godly judgment to ourselves today, God won’t have to place a heavy hand upon us tomorrow.

The fear of God: not optional in politics

If we’re timid before men, we show they count more than God does in our hearts: “The Lord is on my side; I will not fear. What can man do to me?” (Psalm 118:6). The left-right political paradigm propagated by the mainstream media creates a false choice for voters while feeding our fear of man. The Biblical paradigm tends in a completely different direction. Fear of man perpetuates itself because man-fearing people instinctively know deep down that the Lord is not on their side. In Christ’s day, the people were up in arms about their slavery to Rome but didn’t care about their slavery to sin. Although sin is the true enslaver of souls (every other alleged enslavement is false and perpetuates the environmental fallacy and satanic determinism), they couldn’t see that Jesus came to save them from it because they were focused on political freedom. When Jesus got in the way of their faulty focus, they killed Him.

Fear of God – relevance to society: Fear of God that is deep, true, and convicting entails a regard for all of His laws and commandments. It results in a society of justice, peace, sound money, diligence, productivity, and blessing. Conversely, “the fear of man bringeth a snare” (Prov. 29:25) and leads to a society based on statist means of salvation and deliverance. To exchange the fear of God for the fear of man is to transfer total power from God (Whose Law maximizes our liberty) to the state (which must minimize our liberty to make good on its promises: to provide total protection, the state needs total power). The fear of man shifts the basis of societal order from moral to regulatory, with the result being totalitarian socialism. This is part of the curse of “making flesh (human means) our arm (strength)” (Jer. 17:5). Only the fear of God leads to boldness before men and true freedom. A God-fearing people will not tolerate the encroaching totalitarianism we are realizing in modern America.

Fear of God – relevance to voting: One of the texts routinely preached upon and used in Election Sermons in colonial America was 2 Sam. 23:2-3. “The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and His word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.” This was not David’s personal opinion. This was an imperative laid down by God Himself for all men and women who govern. While early Americans understood that God forbids putting anyone into power who doesn’t rule in the fear of God, today’s voters are more fearful of “wasting a vote” than they are of God and His clear command. As Jesus said, “I will forewarn ye whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after He hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear Him” (Luke 12:5).

Fear of God – relevance to justice: Above anything else, God requires His people to do justice (Deut. 16:20). Fear of man dislodges a person’s commitment to justice because it always entails a rejection of God. Since God loves justice (Ps. 11:7, Ps. 33:5), injustice leads to God’s judgment. Justice done by a political ruler is proportionate to that ruler’s fear of God. Conversely, acts of injustice are done in proportion to a ruler’s fear of man. Therefore, an electorate’s fear of man is its own punishment due to the injustice the people ultimately suffer at the hands of ungodly rulers they put into office, as well as the people’s ensuing enslavement to continue acting upon their fear of man. A man-fearing electorate incites God’s judgment not only on themselves, but also on the man-fearing rulers they elect. The “unjust judge” of Luke 18:1-8 “did not fear God” and denied the widow the justice she sought from him. The officers of state are to act as ministers of God (Rom. 13:4), exercising specific limited powers delegated by God – the ministry of justice. If they keep God’s laws, they share in God’s authority over human life (Ps. 82:6). If judges and rulers fail to keep God’s laws, perverting justice, they “shall die like men” (Ps. 82:7). God Himself will bring judgment and capital punishment on a nation that despises His Law.

The Law of God: not optional for liberty

America – God’s Laws abandoned The spilling of innocent blood in the tragic abortion industry is just the tip of the iceberg of the many transgressions of God’s Law that America will be judged for. God has laid out how a society must be run in His Word. All of His laws are important, and our founding fathers would be aghast that modern America is in continual violation of most of them. For example, our forefathers knew that God’s Word says if His people obey His statutes with regard to citizen-administered relief of poverty (annualized to 3.4% of one’s income – Deut. 14:28-29, 16:12-15), “there would be no poor among you” (Deut. 15:4). But “hardness of heart” (Deut. 15:7) and refusal to obey God’s statute have led to the transfer of social responsibility to the state so that America’s welfare state has swollen to immense size without ending poverty at all (see Taxation paper). Our forefathers would be appalled at how many parents today disregard God’s mandate to raise their children in the fear of God (Eph. 6:4), and instead give them to America’s state-run humanistic government schools during their critical formative years. God’s judgment on the nation for this particular lawlessness has been multi-faceted: increasing property taxes and a shameful perpetual decline in morality and academics (see Education paper). Our Christian founding fathers wrote safeguards into the Constitution against the unbiblical fiat currency we currently use, which God declares to be an abomination to Him (Prov. 11:1) (see papers on Taxation and Economic Crises). America’s founders who embraced a biblical foreign policy of nonintervention (Deut. 17:6) would be fearing God’s judgment today regarding pre-emptive military campaigns (2 Chron. 35:20-25) that harm noncombatants (see National Defense paper). Neglecting God’s Word and entrusting the state to handle poverty, education, or anything not expressly assigned to it by God’s Word brings God’s curse. Jer. 17:5 treats the person who trusts in man, who makes flesh their arm, as one “whose heart departeth from the Lord.” To entrust the state with prerogatives that God is holding us individually accountable for means our hearts have departed from Him.

America – free republic to totalitarian state The legal foundations of America, established on Biblical law via common law, have eroded and the character of the people has decayed as a growing reliance on the state has displaced personal responsibility under God. Any state not based on Biblical law is a false god, for it replaces God’s laws with its own. Jeremiah 2:11-13 compares Israel to her neighbors, observing that the heathen were more loyal to their false gods than Israel was to the True One. Israel exchanged the Lord God “for things that do not profit.” This is a double evil: “forsaking the fountain of living waters” (God) while “hewing out for themselves broken cisterns that cannot hold any water” (v.13). Hewing out for themselves means building a society according to one’s own wisdom. Totalitarianism is introduced incrementally as society shifts from a moral to a regulatory basis. The loss of liberty is not detectible over the short run. Citizens come to regard humanistic regulations as sensible and desirable. This is how “the wicked frame mischief using law” (Ps. 94:20). Ortiz says of the New Covenant of Hebrews 8:10, “Herein lies the essential structure of Christianity: God-Law-Individual. It is direct, immediate, and unencumbered by ecclesiocracy and statism.” Today we are encumbered by these joint evils – mega churches (where people are entertained and kept busy but are not taught God’s Law) and a big brother civil government (which is demanding obedience in the name of security to an ever-expanding tablet of humanistic laws) – because we have abandoned God’s laws and our responsibility to obey them. When people disregard God’s laws, the state takes over at the high cost of abridging individual liberty.

America – the theological underpinnings of national decline 47% of American adults attend church regularly – sufficient for Christians to prevail culturally as they did with vastly smaller numbers at our founding. But “modern Christian leaders have the ear of national leaders and preach in the White House and in Congress without affecting the national march into degeneracy and apostasy” (Rushdoony). This dichotomy exists because our forefathers, who worked to keep America a light to the nations, embraced a faith far removed from that held by most Americans today. Theology and doctrine shifted in the 1830s, propelling conservative Christianity through more than a century of self-marginalized decline and irrelevance. This trend only began to slow in the 1960s and 1970s with home and Christian schooling. Unfortunately, there’s a huge gap between modern Christendom and the culture-shaping convictions of our forefathers regarding the foundations of liberty: God’s 613 laws, commandments, statutes, precepts and testimonies (Deut. 28, Lev. 26, Ps. 119:64). (See Theology paper.)

America – her foundation is still our hope for the future Since the 1830s, theologians have progressively cut the heart out of Christian activism, arguing that “you don’t polish brass on a sinking ship” because cultural darkness is supposedly increasing by God’s design. “People who expect the world to end very soon, and are planning on being raptured out of it, are not likely to be concerned about dominion over the earth, nor the application of God’s Law to the whole of life” (Rushdoony). 1 John 2:8 teaches that “the darkness is passing away and the true Light is shining already.” The Scripture cannot be broken: the darkness is in actual process of passing away as the Great Commission to disciple all nations (Matt. 28:18-20) is obeyed by God’s people and He continues to pour out His Spirit upon all flesh (Acts 2:17). If we truly fear God, we will take Christ’s question seriously: “Why callest me Lord, Lord, and do not the things I say?” Christians are not to neglect God’s Law: “God forbid, rather, we establish the law!” (Rom. 3:31). “Turning the world-changing Word of God into a symbol of impotence, escapism and cultural irrelevance entails locking Christ up in the church. If we persist in locking Him up inside the church, He will shatter the church just as He shattered the tomb.” (Rushdoony)